This document discusses the 1979 Iran hostage crisis case between the United States and Iran that was brought before the International Court of Justice. It provides background on the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran and the taking of hostages. It outlines the positions of both sides and the Court's decisions. The Court found that Iran violated international law and obligations under the Vienna Conventions. It ordered Iran to release the hostages and return control of the embassy. However, Iran did not immediately comply and the crisis was eventually resolved through negotiations resulting in the Algiers Accords.
International Humanitarian Law Lecture 19 - 70 Years of Geneva ConventionsNilendra Kumar
Geneva Conventions are the main plank of IHL treaty law adopted by India to abide by protection, compliance and adherence norms in armed conflicts
This presentation is a review of past 70 years resume in it's regard.
The International Criminal Court (commonly referred to as the ICC or ICCt)
is the world's first permanent, international judicial body capable of bringing
perpetrators to justice and providing redress to victims when states are unable or
unwilling to do so.1
International Humanitarian Law Lecture 19 - 70 Years of Geneva ConventionsNilendra Kumar
Geneva Conventions are the main plank of IHL treaty law adopted by India to abide by protection, compliance and adherence norms in armed conflicts
This presentation is a review of past 70 years resume in it's regard.
The International Criminal Court (commonly referred to as the ICC or ICCt)
is the world's first permanent, international judicial body capable of bringing
perpetrators to justice and providing redress to victims when states are unable or
unwilling to do so.1
Settlement of international disputes (International Law) Amicable(Rajat Vaish...R V
Types of Settlement of dispute negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement
The methods of peaceful settlement of disputes fall into three categories:
1.) Diplomatic Method
2.) Adjudicative Method
3.) Instituional Method
What is international dispute? What are the various ways of settling the international dispute? Explain Pacific means of settling the dispute. Explain the coercive method of solving the dispute. In this ppt we deal with all these question that will be helpful for law exams.
International Humanitarian Law Lecture 11 - International Armed ConflictNilendra Kumar
This presentation recognises two categories of armed conflicts. It further describes the applicability of the conventions specially where it is non international in the strict sense of the term.
International Humanitarian Law, (Lecture 15)- Distinction between internation...Nilendra Kumar
This presentation explains the nature of an armed conflict and the salient differences between international armed conflict and non international armed conflict while also highlighting its relevance there to.
This presentation discusses the rights of parties to a conflict to adopt methods and means of warfare at their choice while also highlighting their limits in this regard.
LEAGUE OF NATIONS: ORGANISATION.
The main organs of the League of Nations were the General Assembly, the Council and the Secretariat. The General Assembly, which met once a year, consisted of representatives of all the member states and decided on the organization's policy. The Council's main function was to settle international disputes.
Understanding Diplomatic Privileges and ImmunitiesKai Bruns
Campus talk @Middlesex University in Dubai
An internal US inspection report released this summer criticized the US ambassador to the UAE, HE Michael Corbin, for misusing parts of his diplomatic privileges. Not only in the UAE the granting of diplomatic privileges and immunities is a controversially debated topic. In the public eye diplomats seem to enjoy traditional prerogatives enabling them to float above the law. In the light of abuses of diplomatic immunities such as parking, speeding or even more serious crimes such as drug and people trafficking the upcoming Monday night speaker lecture will raise the question why states grant diplomatic immunities.
In order to create a basic understanding the lecture will analyze the historical evolution of legal doctrines underlying the concession of diplomatic privileges and immunities. Diplomatic law governing the inviolability of permanent mission premises and immunities of their staff are regulated in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (VCDR). We will look at the codification history of the VCDR and discuss cases of abuses of diplomatic immunities in order to get a feel for the link between legal theory and diplomatic practice to deepen our understanding of the benefits of such long-standing diplomatic practice.
THANK YOU To The Republic of Ecuador (ASYLUM Of Julian Assange)VogelDenise
The United States of America thinks that it is ABOVE the law and REPEATEDLY relies on using “FRONTS” (as MOTHER ALLY Great Britain and SISTER ALLY Sweden) to hide its ROLE in such RETALIATORY/CRIMINAL acts leveled AGAINST Julian Assange for REPORTING THE NEWS and EXPOSING the United States of America’s WAR CRIMES / NUREMBERG VIOLATIONS and other TERRORISTS acts! Please be PATIENT, United States of America President Barack Obama and his Legal Counsel/White Supremacist (Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz) will DELIVER the HEAD of the United States of America “ON A PLATTER!”
Settlement of international disputes (International Law) Amicable(Rajat Vaish...R V
Types of Settlement of dispute negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement
The methods of peaceful settlement of disputes fall into three categories:
1.) Diplomatic Method
2.) Adjudicative Method
3.) Instituional Method
What is international dispute? What are the various ways of settling the international dispute? Explain Pacific means of settling the dispute. Explain the coercive method of solving the dispute. In this ppt we deal with all these question that will be helpful for law exams.
International Humanitarian Law Lecture 11 - International Armed ConflictNilendra Kumar
This presentation recognises two categories of armed conflicts. It further describes the applicability of the conventions specially where it is non international in the strict sense of the term.
International Humanitarian Law, (Lecture 15)- Distinction between internation...Nilendra Kumar
This presentation explains the nature of an armed conflict and the salient differences between international armed conflict and non international armed conflict while also highlighting its relevance there to.
This presentation discusses the rights of parties to a conflict to adopt methods and means of warfare at their choice while also highlighting their limits in this regard.
LEAGUE OF NATIONS: ORGANISATION.
The main organs of the League of Nations were the General Assembly, the Council and the Secretariat. The General Assembly, which met once a year, consisted of representatives of all the member states and decided on the organization's policy. The Council's main function was to settle international disputes.
Understanding Diplomatic Privileges and ImmunitiesKai Bruns
Campus talk @Middlesex University in Dubai
An internal US inspection report released this summer criticized the US ambassador to the UAE, HE Michael Corbin, for misusing parts of his diplomatic privileges. Not only in the UAE the granting of diplomatic privileges and immunities is a controversially debated topic. In the public eye diplomats seem to enjoy traditional prerogatives enabling them to float above the law. In the light of abuses of diplomatic immunities such as parking, speeding or even more serious crimes such as drug and people trafficking the upcoming Monday night speaker lecture will raise the question why states grant diplomatic immunities.
In order to create a basic understanding the lecture will analyze the historical evolution of legal doctrines underlying the concession of diplomatic privileges and immunities. Diplomatic law governing the inviolability of permanent mission premises and immunities of their staff are regulated in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (VCDR). We will look at the codification history of the VCDR and discuss cases of abuses of diplomatic immunities in order to get a feel for the link between legal theory and diplomatic practice to deepen our understanding of the benefits of such long-standing diplomatic practice.
THANK YOU To The Republic of Ecuador (ASYLUM Of Julian Assange)VogelDenise
The United States of America thinks that it is ABOVE the law and REPEATEDLY relies on using “FRONTS” (as MOTHER ALLY Great Britain and SISTER ALLY Sweden) to hide its ROLE in such RETALIATORY/CRIMINAL acts leveled AGAINST Julian Assange for REPORTING THE NEWS and EXPOSING the United States of America’s WAR CRIMES / NUREMBERG VIOLATIONS and other TERRORISTS acts! Please be PATIENT, United States of America President Barack Obama and his Legal Counsel/White Supremacist (Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz) will DELIVER the HEAD of the United States of America “ON A PLATTER!”
Rights of Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons with a special reference ...inventionjournals
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention (IJHSSI) is an international journal intended for professionals and researchers in all fields of Humanities and Social Science. IJHSSI publishes research articles and reviews within the whole field Humanities and Social Science, new teaching methods, assessment, validation and the impact of new technologies and it will continue to provide information on the latest trends and developments in this ever-expanding subject. The publications of papers are selected through double peer reviewed to ensure originality, relevance, and readability. The articles published in our journal can be accessed online.
11/25/19 ICC AMICUS CURIAE Of Vogel Denise Newsome (UIE Seal)VogelDenise
17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
This is the Amicus Curiae that the United States of America’s President Donald Trump, Congressional Members, Military, their Legal Counsel Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz and their CO-Conspirators (Town of Utica MS Officials/Hinds County MS Officials/Newsome’s Siblings, etc.) had the Utica International Embassy’s Interim Prime Minister Vogel Denise Newsome KIDNAPPED over on 03/25/19, and conspired to have her MURDERED for purposes of silencing her voice in efforts of avoiding Investigations and Prosecution for War Crimes not only in Afghanistan, but here in the United States of America and across the WORLD!
While USA’s Congressional Members are using their Zionist-Controlled Mainstream Media to DISTRACT with their President Trump Impeachment Scandal, we are staying focused and are using our time to provide the WORLD with TRUTH and being sure that HISTORY for the FALL of the United States of America is accurate and that Donald Trump does not take the Fall alone for the WAR CRIMES orchestrated and carried out under the direction and Leadership of the Nazi/Zionist Law Firm of Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz!
This is only the BEGINNING of GREAT Things to come now that we are releasing to the PUBLIC/WORLD the attempts on the Utica International Embassy’s Leader’s Life in the USA’s quest to AVOID Investigations and Prosecutions in the Afghanistan Situation, FAILED Venezuela Invasion/Venezuela Situation, and CONSPIRACIES to have Vogel Denise Newsome MURDERED!
Irrefutable Proof ICTY Is Corrupt Court/Irrefutable Proof the Hague Court Ca...Jill Starr
I represented the country of, The Republika of Srpska, and I was an, United States Citizen). No one ever did this before. There was no “observer status for NGOs.
These Secret Documentary Evidence Shows the ICC, can smuggle GOLD BARS, DRUGS AND ANYTHING ELSE THEY WANT TO WITHOUT DECLARING THEM, ORGANIZED CRIME WISH THEY HAD SUCH A DEAL, ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS STATE, THEY ARE CARRYING THESE ITEMS AROUND THE WORLD ,”IN THE NAME OF THEIR ICC COURT.”
THEY HAD SUBSTANTIAL DISCUSSIONS ON TRADING CRIMINAL VERDICTS FOR CASH COUNTRY FUNDING FROM THE EU AND OTHER COUNTRIES STATING THE WILL PUT ANYONE IN JAIL IN THEIR HAGUE JAIL CELLS, FOR THE HIGHEST COUNTRY THAT GIVES IT THE MOST CASH AND DISCUSSED AUCTIONING OFF VERDICTS STARTING AT THE PRICE IN $30,000 SAID THE BRITISH AMBASSADOR. Another Ambassador said he thought it ,” was better to buy a criminal verdict from the ICC, for $40,000- and other Ambassadors spoke is if criminal life sentences were merely auction items for cash . And, they had the right to put anyone they wanted in jail by “PAYING OFF THE HAGUE AND IT’S PROSECUTOR, SERGE BRAMMERTZ..
The Principle of Non refoulement as a Tool to Fight Extraordinary Rendition u...BROOK KEBEDE
The primary objective of this article is answering the question of when an African state is involved in extraordinary rendition activities and it affects the lives of individuals outside its sovereign territory, how the principle of non-refoulement will help us to establish extraterritorial responsibility pursuant to the African Charter to which this African state is a party?
Religious extremists, Paris terrorism attack on the November 13 and Beirut terrorism attack are briefly mentioned and explained in this ppt.
Enjoy and be nice to everyone
This presentation is made by Samin VossoughiRad. American University for Humanities- Tbilisi campus
The security Dilemma is the them of the presentation and it has been explained exactly why states goes to war
This presentation is made by Samin VossoughiRad. American University for Humanities- Tbilisi campus
Defense Planing is one of the major subject of NATO. this presentation shows who this defense works.
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence LawyersHarpreetSaini48
Discover how Mississauga criminal defence lawyers defend clients facing weapon offence charges with expert legal guidance and courtroom representation.
To know more visit: https://www.saini-law.com/
Synopsis On Annual General Meeting/Extra Ordinary General Meeting With Ordinary And Special Businesses And Ordinary And Special Resolutions with Companies (Postal Ballot) Regulations, 2018
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...Massimo Talia
This guide aims to provide information on how lawyers will be able to use the opportunities provided by AI tools and how such tools could help the business processes of small firms. Its objective is to provide lawyers with some background to understand what they can and cannot realistically expect from these products. This guide aims to give a reference point for small law practices in the EU
against which they can evaluate those classes of AI applications that are probably the most relevant for them.
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentationseri bangash
"Lifting the Corporate Veil" is a legal concept that refers to the judicial act of disregarding the separate legal personality of a corporation or limited liability company (LLC). Normally, a corporation is considered a legal entity separate from its shareholders or members, meaning that the personal assets of shareholders or members are protected from the liabilities of the corporation. However, there are certain situations where courts may decide to "pierce" or "lift" the corporate veil, holding shareholders or members personally liable for the debts or actions of the corporation.
Here are some common scenarios in which courts might lift the corporate veil:
Fraud or Illegality: If shareholders or members use the corporate structure to perpetrate fraud, evade legal obligations, or engage in illegal activities, courts may disregard the corporate entity and hold those individuals personally liable.
Undercapitalization: If a corporation is formed with insufficient capital to conduct its intended business and meet its foreseeable liabilities, and this lack of capitalization results in harm to creditors or other parties, courts may lift the corporate veil to hold shareholders or members liable.
Failure to Observe Corporate Formalities: Corporations and LLCs are required to observe certain formalities, such as holding regular meetings, maintaining separate financial records, and avoiding commingling of personal and corporate assets. If these formalities are not observed and the corporate structure is used as a mere façade, courts may disregard the corporate entity.
Alter Ego: If there is such a unity of interest and ownership between the corporation and its shareholders or members that the separate personalities of the corporation and the individuals no longer exist, courts may treat the corporation as the alter ego of its owners and hold them personally liable.
Group Enterprises: In some cases, where multiple corporations are closely related or form part of a single economic unit, courts may pierce the corporate veil to achieve equity, particularly if one corporation's actions harm creditors or other stakeholders and the corporate structure is being used to shield culpable parties from liability.
Car Accident Injury Do I Have a Case....Knowyourright
Every year, thousands of Minnesotans are injured in car accidents. These injuries can be severe – even life-changing. Under Minnesota law, you can pursue compensation through a personal injury lawsuit.
Matthew Professional CV experienced Government LiaisonMattGardner52
As an experienced Government Liaison, I have demonstrated expertise in Corporate Governance. My skill set includes senior-level management in Contract Management, Legal Support, and Diplomatic Relations. I have also gained proficiency as a Corporate Liaison, utilizing my strong background in accounting, finance, and legal, with a Bachelor's degree (B.A.) from California State University. My Administrative Skills further strengthen my ability to contribute to the growth and success of any organization.
A "File Trademark" is a legal term referring to the registration of a unique symbol, logo, or name used to identify and distinguish products or services. This process provides legal protection, granting exclusive rights to the trademark owner, and helps prevent unauthorized use by competitors.
Visit Now: https://www.tumblr.com/trademark-quick/751620857551634432/ensure-legal-protection-file-your-trademark-with?source=share
ADR in criminal proceeding in Bangladesh with global perspective.
Hostages case of iran 1979
1.
2. American University For Humanities
Tbilisi Campus
Samin VossouighiRad
&
Adebayo tayo temitope
International Relations
Law of Diplomacy
U.S. Diplomatic and
Consular Staff in
Tehran Case
(US Vs. TEHRAN)
3. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of diplomatic immunity:
Ensure effective performance by
diplomatic agent and it will protect the
diplomatic agent’s person and dignity
Vienna Convention On Diplomatic
Relations (VCDR) - 1961
The Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations (VCCR) - 1963
5. OUTLINE OF CASE
Hostage : US citizens, diplomatic &
Consular staff
444 days : 4 November 1979 until 20
January 1981
Algiers Accord : 19 January 1981
Was brought to ICJ : dissatisfaction on
the under protection of the embassy
staffs
6. BACKGROUND OF CASE
Shah Reza : 1941
“White Revolution”
Personalized development
50,000 Americans stayed & worked in
Iran
1953: Operation of TPAJAX
The coup: Mohammad Mossadegh
(1953)
Shah Reza return to Iran from exile
Savak (Iran Secret Service)
7. Parties Involved
US Embassy seized by Iranian
militants & Tehran University students.
Seized diplomats, consuls, marine
personnel.
US request for provisional measures
to preserve the rights of US
government.
8. US SIDE : Request
Government of Iran should immediately
release all hostages of US nationals and
facilitate prompt and safe departure from
these person and all other US officers with
dignity and humane.
Government of Iran should clear all the
premises of US embassy and restore the
control of embassy.
Government of Iran must ensure the
protection of diplomats, consuls and other
US personnel are provided and full freedom
for them to carry out their functions within
Iran.
9. Government of Iran cannot place a
trial to any person that attached with
US embassy and refrain from such
trial that be implementing towards US
personnel.
Government of Iran must also ensure
no action taken by them in respect to
US rights based on Court decision
which might threaten lives of the
10. IRAN SIDE:
HUMAN RIGHTS
The militants and Iran authorities have
asserted that the hostages have been
well treated.
In additions, they allowed special visits
from religious and International Red
Cross representatives for the
hostages.
11. COURT PROCEEDING
The government of Iran filed no pleadings and was
not represented in the oral proceedings.
However, the position that had been taken by the
Iranian government was firm and defined in a letter
to the Court by its Minister of Foreign Affairs.
The letter urging the Court no to take notice of the
case and attempted to excuse the events as only:
“a marginal and secondary aspect of an
overall problem [involving] more than 25
years of continual interferences by US in
internal affairs of Iran, the shameless
exploitation of our country…contrary to and
in conflict with all international and
12. VIOLATED INTERNATIONAL
TREATIES
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
Relations (1961),
The Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations (1963)
The Treaty of Amity, Economic
Relations and Consular Rights of 1955
between US and Iran
13. SUBJECT MATTER OF THE
CASE
VIOLATION
Violation of the mission
VCDR 1961 – Article 22
“The receiving State is under a
special duty to take all appropriate
steps to protect the premises of the
mission against any intrusion or
damage and to prevent any
disturbance of the peace of the
mission or impairment of its dignity.”
14. VIOLATION
Violation of the mission
VCDR 1961 –ARTICLE27
“Permit and protect free
communication on the part of the
mission for all official purposes.”
15. VIOLATION
Violation of diplomatic agents
VCDR 1961 –ARTICLE 29
“The person of a diplomatic agent
shall be inviolable. He shall not be liable
to any form of arrest or detention. The
receiving State shall treat him with due
respect and take all appropriate steps to
prevent any attack on his person,
freedom and dignity.”
16. VIOLATION
Vienna Convention of 1961 and 1963
without mention also another facts of:
Treaty of Amity, Economic
Relations and Consular Rights of 1955
Between US and Iran
18. COURT DECISION
On 24 May 1980, the International
Court of Justice was conducted to
justify the dispute settlement for both
sides:
By thirteen votes to two
Government of Iran has violated in
several aspects of its international
obligations
& the violation of the general rules of
international law.
19. COURT DECISION
By thirteen votes to two
The Court of Justice decided that
violation of these obligations engage
the responsibility of Iranian
government towards US under
international law.
20. COURT DECISION
Unanimously
The ICJ decided that Iranian government must
immediately take all steps to redress the situation that
had been caused by them in the event of 4 November
1979, to the end:
Must immediately the unlawful detention of US
Chargé d'affaires, diplomatic and consular staff with
US nationals that have been the hostages and must
immediately release and entrust them to the protecting
Power (Article 45 of VCDR 1961).
Must ensure the release of US personnel are safe
which Iranian authorities will provide any necessary
means of transportation for them to leave Iran.
Must immediately hand over the control of US
embassy and its Consulate in Iran including the
premises, property, documents and archives.
21. COURT DECISION
Unanimously
The Court of Justice decided that
there will be no US diplomatic and
consular staff subjected to judicial
proceedings or to involve them in as
witnesses.
22. COURT DECISION
By thirteen to three
The ICJ had decided that Government
of Iran is under obligation to make
reparation to US government for the
injury from the seizure of US embassy
in Tehran.
23. COURT DECISION
By fourteen vote to one
The Court of Justice had decide that
amount of reparation will be settled by
the either parties or court itself.
24. CONCLUSION
The ICJ decided that Iran must
release the hostages, return the
possession of US embassy and its
related documents.
Iran must make reparations to the US,
the form and amount thereof settled
by the parties or the Court. Iran did not
comply with Court’s judgment
immediately however the matter
solved through negotiation between
US and Iran in Algiers Accord.
25. US President Carter had frozen the
asset of Iranian government in US which
estimate more than $13 billion. Hence,
US-Iran Claims Tribunal was established
to set fund from portion of Iran frozen
assets to settle claim of reparations.
There three separate bank used was
also be set up, two in Bank of England
and the other one is in Central Bank of
Netherlands. Therefore, the US
diplomatic and consular staff in Tehran
case resolved.
26. There are no formal diplomatic relations between
Iran and the United States.
There is no exchange of ambassadors, Iran
maintains an interests section at the Pakistani
Embassy in Washington DC. while Switzerland
represents the interest of USA in Iran
27. The Court expresses regret that Iran did not appear
before it to put forward its arguments. The absence of Iran
from the proceedings brought into operation Article 53 of
the Statute, under which the Court is required, before
finding in the Applicant's favor, to satisfy itself that the
allegations of fact on which the claim is based are well
founded.
In that respect the Court observes that it has had available
to it, in the documents presented by the United States, a
massive body of information from various sources,
including numerous official statements of both Iranian and
United States authorities. This information, the Court
notes, is wholly concordant as to the main facts and has
all been communicated to Iran without evoking any denial.
The Court is accordingly satisfied that the allegations of
fact on which the United States based its claim were well
founded.